funorbfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Inspirations
There's a clear need for a policy on the "Inspiration" field of the game infobox. Vimescarrot has expressed a view that the earliest well-known similar game should be listed - I'll leave it to him to expand and defend his views. My view is complicated and possibly inconsistent, but I'll try to lay it out. Firstly, I think we shouldn't be afraid to put "Unknown" when there isn't a clear inspiration. I value accuracy over completeness. My main contention is that in most cases the mechanic should be the key issue and the "flavour" should be considered irrelevant. For example, in Transmogrify the whole gameshow aspect is irrelevant and shouldn't be used as evidence of inspiration by any gameshow (e.g. Countdown - this is one of my pet peeves). I recognise that there are exceptions to that. Zombie Dawn is an example where the flavour ("you control a zombie horde") clearly preceded the mechanics. However, at present (2008-05-09) it's the only one. A very small number of classic games clearly define their own genre, such that any related game is talked about in terms of the classic. Asteroids would be an example of such a game, and Stellar Shard is rightly listed as inspired by Asteroids. Other genres are so broad that to claim inspiration it should be necessary to demonstrate specific mechanical links. I don't think that StarCannon should be listed as inspired by Xevious - it's perfectly possible that no-one in the entire FunOrb team has ever heard of it. On the other hand, if there's a moderately well-known game with similar powerup mechanics (shooting to cycle through the powerup types is fairly common, but did the idea of having two independent cycles come from anywhere?) that could reasonably be considered a possible inspiration. In such cases, however, I'd favour a qualification: "Possibly X". Or perhaps we could split the field up into "Inspiration" (for cases where we can be reasonably confident) and "Similar games". After all, the main purpose of the field seems to be to help people know whether they want to play the game. If requested I will make a list of the current attributions and my thoughts on them, but for now I'll let others speak. OrbFu 12:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Personally I've not felt a need for the inspiration field, and as such have left all that to other editors. However, I think a similar games field would be good, either as a replacement, or as well as the inspiration field. I also think that in the inspiration field we should use the most notable example, where such an example is reasonably clear. I also think it's not a bad thing to list multiple games. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 13:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC) :I'm going to think on it. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 14:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC) ::Saw your thread on Jagex Lite. Good luck! OrbFu 22:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC) :::Indeed, if we can get Jagex to tell us that would be the best solution. However we'll need them to keep telling us with each new release... Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 22:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC) ::::Since that forum thread didn't get a satisfactory response I think I will suggest we remove the inspiration field. If we really need something to replace it I think a "similar games" field would be preferable. It would certainly prevent discussion/argument about which games actually inspired the funorb games. Quartic ~ insanity is a virtue | Talk 08:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC) :::::Removing it is probably the best option. Unless we can cite sources it's not encyclopaedic anyways. JalYt-Xil-Vimescarrot 12:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)